the galah

i actually watched the first race at marburg. I actually think racing at marburg seems more competitive and everyone has a pre conceived plan of trying ,at least a bit more than they do at the likes of albion park in my opnion.. so marburg is an ok look for the industry from a betting perspective. but race 1 run yesterday wasn't. i had a very small bet on the race and backed the favorite to win ,it was paying $2.80. well they had a false start the first time as the 4 horse never looked like pacing away,then in the re start you could tell it would break,but it mangaed to get to the first bend before doing so,then unfortunately checked 4 of the other runners enough to make you think there was only 3 chances left. The favorite had taken the lead easily early. Well they had only gone 300m with the front 3 about 10 and 20 lengths in front of the 4th and 5th horses, when t mcmullen did what she sometimes does and hooked off the inside and attacked the favorite for the lead. Normally you would think well fair enough,but this time It seemed such a dumb move as she was on the outsider and was attacking the favorite when clearly her horse was being pushed to go faster than it could,so hey, you could tell it was gone as soon as she did that,but they still ran along very fast for about a round like that befiore she sent out the white flag and was stopping badly. Well because they had run along so fast,the field remained spread out and the favorite looked like it was going to win by the length of the straight the way it was travelling. But then they called the race off with a round to go,because the number 4 horse had broken again when at the back,had been taken to the outside of the track by its driver with a gear issue and the mobile vehicle and starter crew vehicle decided to park up on the track while they gave that bloke a hand .The stewsrds saw this and decided to call the race off with a round to go. So if you looked at the video,you could see the horse that had the gear problem had gone on tis merry way well before the horses in the race got to where it had been,,but the starters assistants just stood next to their vehicle in the middle of the track nonchalontly walking back to the vehicle just before the race was called off. They didn't even try to get out of the way after the race was called off,just watching the field run past them,even though none of the horses in the race shied at it,maybe knowing the race had been called off ,thinking well whats the pointb of driving off as its a no race anyway. it was all rather strange.i didn't bother to watch any more races from marburg after that,just changed channels again.

yes i get that.but the thread started off just referring to the effect of geo blocking on racing turnover. my point ,that i made when i joined the thread , was the gain from the geo blocking,certainly from entains point of view,was expected to come from sports betting and that racing may be able to ride the coat tails of that sports betting gain through the trickle down effect. But you seem to think not as much will trickle down as i had hoped.anyways,enjoy the rest of your evening.

well,we've been talking about who provides the new zealand sporting organisations with the money from sports betting. when i suggested,the money came from entain and the nz tab , you said no, its solely the nz tab and that entain got to keep all of their 50% of the sports betting profits and that the nz tab paid the 23% to the nso out of the nz tab's 50% shae of the profits. In other words the nso share came out after the nz tab got its 50% share,not before, as if it was before,then that would have meant entain were contributing,which you said,no they weren't to. then i said, if entain could see they could make so much money from sports betting through geo blocking,then why didn't the nz tab ask the nz governmant to do the geo blocking without the need for entain,thus getting to keep all that extra revenue the geo blocking created. Then you mentioned the 2029 projected figure as if that was a good thing and i came back and again said well why didn't the nz tab just ask for the geo blocking and take all the extra profit in the future ,thus not needing to give away hundreds of millions over the next 25 years. then you seemed to say,hey you've lost me. And then i assume you went and took 2 panadol.

so,your saying, the government negotiated a deal with entain ,which nz racing was all for,to give away a % of profit from sports betting ,so they could get the one off payments and get a smaller % of a big pie,instead a bigger % of a smaller pie pre entain,.,due to the geo blocking. then the obvious question i would ask is. if entain invested in the nz tab because they saw the potential profits that could be generated from the nz tab having a monopoly on nz sports betting after the geo blocking,then why didn't the nz tab just go it alone and have the governmant introduce geo blocking without the need for entain. if your answer is,because of the initial $150 million payment and the 20 million payment from the geo blocking,then it still doesn't make sense if you look at the long term. I'm not saying your wrong,it just doesn't seem to be that clever to me.

i get that. i never said the nz tab was owned by nz racing. i can reasonably argue racings past association with the nz tab is the reason why racing currently get a cut of the sports betting money. Its not a spurios argument i make. Its real.

google and AI,seems they don't agree. so you seem to be saying pre entain the nz tab paid the new zealnad sporting organisations their share from the tab's 100%,then after entain took over,the nz tab pay the nso's the same %,but from only a 50% share. so you appear to be saying the nz governmant negotiated a deal where sports betting would have to double for the tab to be making the same amount as it was pre entain. at least thats what it sounds like you are saying to me.

i just goggled it. and if we can trust google to get it right,entain does contibute a share of its sports betting profits to nz sports organisations. If it didn't and they took out the 50% profit prior to the nz tab distributing to the nso's,then that would mean the nz tab would be gettiing only half of the profits from sports betting that it was prior to partnering with entain. So surely they,nz racing and the govt and nz tab, wouldn't have negotiated a contract with entain where sports betting returns to the racing industry could be , in reality be reduced and nz racing worse off?

yes,but the tab was set up for racing ,hence it can be argued racing deserves the cut of the revenue generated from sports betting that it currently receives.Each sports organisation has a negotiated contract with the tab as to how much they receive.i posted what they were getting in another thread not that long ago,i can't remember whether it was a harness or gallops thread. from memory each national sporting organisation used to get about 5 years ago a minimum of 23 % of net betting revenue and an additional 3%,which goes to sport nz who distribute to all the sporting codes.NSO's can try and negotiaet a greater %,but that wasn't guaranteed. of course net betting revenue is effected by whether favorites have a run,as if they did,gross betting revenue could be high, but net betting revenue not so good. I think some nso would have tried to add a gross betting revenue clause in their contracts,but we don't know what is actually in any contracts between the tab and the sporting organisations. and then of course the main reason entain got into nz,was their share of the revenue they believed would be generrated from the sports betting and entain ,being a partner of the nz tab isn't going to want to give away greater % of profit and will be pretty hard nosed in negotiations with sports groups,which will help the nz tab being their partner. so sports betting is obviously of significane to nz racing and we are fortunate that is the case and that the tab/entain have control now of the nz sports betting. Just how significant is too early to tell you would think,maybe its a big deal,maybe its not. Racings desperately needs every bit of revenue it can get,. the thing about what we are discussing is,the authorities never seem transparent enough for us to make informed conclusions.And you get the impression, thats because they are only guessing.So that doesn't fill anyone with much confidence.

The sports betting increase through the nz tab,since the geo blocking,is obviously going to be a factor in helping nz racing. Exactly how much the nz racing industry will get from increased sports turnover seems unclear at this stage,but you would assume it will significant,just how significant is unclear. for racing,it was always going to be questionable as to whether the increases in turnover on the nz tab,were going to make up for the lost revenue they were getting from the overseas bookies,who previously took betting and paid fees, on the nz racing product. then you have to factor in the % increase the thoroughbred and harness will get from receiving the greyhound industries share ,once they finish. And i do agree with hesi when he talks about supply and demand as regards the horse pool available for racing. Thats something i can't understand why the harness side don't stress more. I.e. there is going to be greater demand for the lower numbers of horses being bred,whatever the quality. personally i think the gallops administrators are being more fiscally responsible currently than the harness,and will be in a better position going forward. But i'm still like you,i doubt both sides of the industry can sustain their current level of funding. But we still can't really know for sure until the impact of the factors i've mentioned play out.

when the ladbrokes racing club closed the aussie ones were either sold or sent to nz .

actually i read earlier this year the average cost of having a galloper in training in nsw was around $55,000 a year. And it said 1% of horses earned about 26% of the total stakemoney in nsw gallops.

they had a similar thing in australia called the ladbrooks racing club in australia, which involved gallopers,harness and greyhounds. they shut that down in february.

its certainly been a very lengthy,well publicised hearing taking many months and the report has been long awaited. so i would think the report is the opposite of low on the agenda,i would imagine it is the top priority of the newer board and management team you refer to at greyhound nsw. i'm guessing the reason it hasn't been released is because some of its contents will again be damaging to the public perception of greyhound racing in jnsw and will play ijnto the animal welfare activists narrative.. for that reason,i would guess the nsw board have required extra time to address the issues the report will raise in an attempt to mitigate the loss of public confidence. after all,if it has nothing damaging in the report,it would have been released some time ago.

sometimes owners have to make hard decisions.At the end of the day,they did what they thought was no doubt best and they ended up owning a nz cup winner. making decisions about things like that would have been difficult for all involved.. borana definetly stood at stud for a few seasons.He left a few winners but wasn't that popular and was only bred for a few seasons. When he finished that part of his life he was offered to shand by the part owner,as i understand it.He would have been in his late teens i think then and being a stallion it would not have been so easy to find a home for him.Hopefully they found a home for him after that . i did speak to someone one time about that,but i personally don't know about that.

not sure whether your just taking the mickey as the answer is obvious. i'll quote myself to explain it for you,to help you out..

yes those couple of fields were full of mostly christchurch horses..Just an extra float fee to timaru i suppose. Will they run a couple of extra races or can a couple of the original onesprogrammed for sunday to fit them in? i'm not sure about the negativity you mention. i just follow the racing,but those south island horses get to race for much better stake money than the harness people and they have much better betting fields They also seem to have that many ex north island horses race in the south island. Thats a huge advantage that the harness people don't have. they don't have to go to all the expense of breeding,looking after the mares,raising them when they are younger. They just get to take them over when they have shown enough promise to be competitve up north, to warrant racing in the south island. really south island gallops people,whether it be owners or trainers , should not underestimate just how lucky they are to be able to do that and how much money they save becaus of that. for example i just had a look at the timaru results from last week. 6 of the 10 winners werre ex north island horses.That seems to be the norm these days. actually,when you look at the betting turnovers,they are ok but the sunday gallops meetings are poor. But it seems to be a policy to push meetings onto sundays and get the punters to focus on the australian races on a saturday. Personally i think that has major negatives, as well as the positives. It certainly hasn't helped the harness racing having to race with such long intervals between races. Who in their right mind wants to go sit on a racecourse on a sunday where they have 40 minutes between races. That must be so boring. I mentioned on the harness side of this forum the pathetic turnover a $100,000 race they had at awapuni recently, that they ran on a sunday. It was only something like $3,700 in the win tote pool for the $100,000 race that had a good field. anyway,i think the south isalnd gallops really have it good these days,so i doubt they should be moaning too much.

b may has been riding particularly well lately. J taplin has looked very promising as well and with his 3 kilo claim. his ride on little but firce was an excellent winning ride. actually b may has been doing a lot of riding for the carston stable. I made comment a few months ago about that stable and the way they seemed to like to have their horses ridden which was producing below par results. . Well since the stable has changed the jockeys they are going a lot better than they used to. Maybe its had something to do with the horses as well,but these days you can back them with confidence whereas you certainly couldn't in the past. Actually i think since he changed jockeys ,the main jockey he used to have riding them,whom doesn't ride as much for him now, seems to have improved a bit,although personally i still try and avoid betting on him.But thats just me. so i hope they all bounce back quick. I was surprised they cancelled the last 2 races. That just seems to be how it works these days. I realise it would have been upsetting for the other jockeys,but to me that said,jockeys these days aren't mentally as tough as they used to be.That may not be a very p.c. comment but i think its true.,. When i initially heard that i feared a jockey had died as i thought that had to be the reason. But fortunately t was just because they were too upset to ride because their workmates had got hurt.

doesn't it seem odd that they still haven't released the report into greyhound racing in nsw. the governmant and the greyhound administrators would have had the final report for a couple of months now and all the animal welfare groups are saying,if you've got nothing to hide,why can't you just release the report. I understand the parliament has also passed a resolution asking fot the release of the report,but it hasn't happened so far. i guess that all means it won't paint the nsw greyhound industry in a good light. Why else take so long to release it.the delay is not a good look they did make witnesses evidence available during the hearings. i was going for a walk the other day and a bloke was walking his greyhound and we passed each other. I couldn't help but feeling a bit sad for all the people and dogs who are involved in greyhound racing. theres a lot of history there as well. Unfortunately i've always thought the closure was inevitable for some years now,given the mass production type business model that the bigger kennels use. Like anything that is big business,they simply got too big and they had too much wastage(actual living dogs) that cost them money.And like anything big scale,its based a lot on profit and you cut your losses without enough consideration of the impact and perception of such behavior.so i've never had much sympathy in that respect,as the industry chose to allow the creation of the issues that lead to it being closed. The injury issue obviously was significant,but i think the industry could have avoided closure had injuries just been the only reason. i still like to have the odd bet on the australian dogs. i like watching the dogs run. i especially enjoy seeing them thunder down the straight tracks and i wish nz had pivoted to straight track racing long ago. wanganui straight track racing is good to watch But you could tell that was coming all too late, in my opinion.

yes borana was certainly a good horse right from the start. i think george shand won something like 17 races with him in the 2-4 age group races.Then he had a run of outs at the start of the following season,,which would have been in the open class ranks and then there was that unfortunate nz cup incident. It was very shortly after that, the owner decided to change trainers and gave the horse to p jones.I think naturally shand would have been very disappointed,that happens sometimes in racing.At the time,one of my relations had had a horse trained by mr shand.When borana suffered an injury as a 2 year old after wiinning 6 races, shand nursed him back to racing.i recall being told he may have even slept near the horse to make sure he was ok for a start,not long after coming back,maybe from an op after the injury,although whether that true or not,it was just what someone told me once.I know Shand would go smooth the washdyke track with the thing they used to do that,every time he worked the horse when recovering from the injury. i understand borana ,after serving a few seasons at stud,no longer was sougt after as a stallion and from memory i think his owner had passed away by then. The same married couple gammalite refeers to had owned him all the way through,but once the husband,mr murry passed away they could not find a home for borana and i understand mrs murray,unable to find a home for him, offered the horse back to the shands,but they declined. i don't know what happened to the horse after that,whether they found a home for him. someone thought not,but i wouldn't guarantee that was the case. that was at a time when harness racing was still enjoying the golden era and owning and training nice horses,expecially one so good as borana,would have had substanial impact on those involved and is often the case,there could be the ups and downs as well. the start of boranas racing career came the following year from when mr shand reired the top trotter,pointer hanover that he trained.poiner hanover was an open class trotter who raced in a lot of the bigger races. He had an interesting race one night at addington against the champion trotter scitch tar. Scotsh tar was known to be highly strung and mr shand was known to have a very loud whistle. One particular night at addington he put his whistle to use ,it could be heard a long way away and scotch tar broke when racing alongside him. mr shand did suffer a bad injury when he was getting older when he suffered interference in a race where from memory half a dozen horses fell.when people get older i would imagine that would knock you around a bit. from memory,he made a comeback and had eastwood jaunty. i think one of the things ghe enjoyed was not only winning,but pushing someone out 3 wide. i could be wrong,but one of his sons i think still trains from the same property. He had a runner in yesterday. He had a nice horse,adventereux ,or something like that that used to run against the likes of right bower who was trained by ian cameron. i've noted that his wife does a lot of good work for the timaru club,especially trying to help with the family days.

i wonder sometimes about how accurate a portrayal we get,even with the likes of nz rugby. for example,the womens rugby world cup just finished. for the last couple of months i had watched the tv 1 coverage and got the impression that nz making the final was inevitable, like it was a given they would play england in the final. then about a month before the tournament started,i watched some bbc coverage,in particular one lengthy segment on the bbc about how dominant england had been for some time,with canada expected to be the team they would meet in the final and that canada was seeded second. Not once did it mention the nz team. and i thought to myself,whats going on there,how can canada be ranked 2nd and nz not get a mention,given the hype from our nz media about the nz team. then i noted as the tournament started ,the mainstream bbc seemed to change their tune,loved putting on the nz team doing a haka,showing the mixed races of the nz team ,mentioned nz's history and noted all the supporters it had. I thought, hang on,thats a different type of media to the ones from the bbc that interviewed people who did not give the nz team a mention just a month before. well it turned out another example of how media can put a narrative thats not accurate.

couldn't you turn that argument on its head and say,she is the one trying to protect the gullible,i.e. those who have chosen to believe that arcano was not treated with a performance enhancer. And those who were possibly defrauded when they bet in the race that arcano won. anyway,you acknowledge shes found a niche market either way,so its working for her.

curmudgeons. i had to look that up to be sure it meant what i thought.- bad tempered,usually old. That seems to be how you view many on here who post.i think thats its a bit harsh myself. actually i like the new format,it adds a bit of colour. i like the other trackside presenters,they all are good,but thursday nights racing could do with a bit of colour. As you say,they seem to be getting punter particaption,which indicates many tune in and follow them. i'm not sure how long the show will last,maybe the novelty might wear off. I think it adds something,even if that something is for viewers who prefer the old format,to follow their bets and think, they may be a bit all over the place with their betting..

i watched this race last night,did not bet on it ,but when i rread the stipes report i didn't think it was accurate description of what actually hasppened in the race. firstly,it says play the ace, over raced on occasions. just exactly where on the video does it show that happening. on the 2 occassions t mitchell, pushed it hard to hold the lead over about 300m and then again for 200m, during the first 1700m of the race,his horse was not over racing. nor was it over racing for the 50m before he pulled off the trail on 2 different occassions he had another crack at the 2 favorites. The only time the horse over raced if you look at the video was for about 100m with 1300m to run. now i don't know why he adopted the tactics he did ,on the complete outsider who had not raced for several months. My guess would be ,maybe he didn't like the horses personality when warming it up and was having a bad day prior. But of course thats just a guess and not relevant to what actually he did.The horse naturally dropped out a long way from home to finish a tired and distant last. shouldn't the stipes have at least have taken the time to ask the trainer what his instructions and opened an inquiry. i say that,because i can guarantee if that was an amateur driver,they would have been looked at far more closely and my guess,they would have been given a 6 month suspension for such a odd drive(if it was an amateur). then secondly,the stipes report said jaccka opa caused its driver some difficulty in the last 50m of the race. well again,thats not what the video shows. The video cleary shows its driver,k coppins ,ran up in behind the horse in front of her ,then instead of taking hold of her horse when it could no longer progress forward,she angled it out,then realised there was no room to do that without interfering with the horse outside her,so went from turning its head to the right quickly to turning its head to the left quickly .,throwing it off balance. I mean ,it was clearly the manner in which it was driven that was the main contibutor to the horse going off balance. i've mentioned this driver several times in the pasti,because she seems to be getting no guidance from the stipes and repeats the same driving. Why is that?.

this seems to have been the common theme throughout your posts. and the specific case thats been used as the example of what you define as defamation,relates to the trainer mitchell kerr and the horse he trained arcarno. Your defending Mitchell kerrs good name from defamation....yeah i get what you've been saying and you've said it well,but it still seems sort of humourous in some ways. oh and when hrnz made comment about being aware of the fridge gas allegations and make comment ,as they have with other rumours about other illegal substances in the past,do you view them saying ,they are aware of the allegations,as defamation of the whole industry. After all,they have no definitive proof but comment on such things. .patreon,whats that?.. Is that like the nz version of only fans,but including horse dissections? that would be a strange combination if it was? i don't have the spare cash to subscribe to find out. sounds like nairn gets around the world a bit. ireland, scotland and thailand, going by what you and chief say. I mean i have no idea about her,but the self promoting she does sems to be working for her. Its like she has found a niche market. all the talk about her on this forum,gets her known by more,sort of making her even bigger and wouldn't that be making her think this is all playing out in her favour.

i haven't seen anything said in this topic to get irritated about.That includes anything nairn said.And Bit of a yarn's not a forum that has people whose opinions irritate me. but this is a topic(animal welfare and care of ex racehorses) that can be divisive elsewhere,whether its handled delicately or not. just is.And theres people out there who are unhappy with how things are going in life for themselves and seem to transfer their frustration onto others and this can be a topic that draws that out. I'm talking mostly people who support nairn's point of view. I'm not meaing her or anyone else whos posted on this topic either. just people are people in the real world.. Not wrong again. You do like to say that a lot to me. Can you at least say it when i have said something thats wrong,as i think you overuse it and it loses it effect on me. . you said "rehoming agencies retrain horses so they can be rehomed." I said "rehoming places took horses with the intention of rehoming them". You say tomato i say tomato type thing.